Introduction...2 A Note About Data Privacy...3

Transcription

1

2 Introduction A Note About Data Privacy Indexes Overall Satisfaction Recommend Employment at the University...5 Accept Position at the University Again....6 Satisfaction with Work Satisfaction with Department Chair/Responsible Administrator Support 8 Satisfaction with Support for Scholarship and Teaching.. Satisfaction with Supervisor Satisfaction with Coworkers Understanding of Job Responsibilities Understanding of Job Importance.... Confidence in the Direction Satisfaction with Leadership Satisfaction with Tenure Process (on tenure track).. Satisfaction with Tenure Process (tenured)... Clock stoppage Support Emphasis on Teaching Emphasis on Research Emphasis on Service Perceptions of Job Security Turnover Intentions Overall Satisfaction with Pay..... Satisfaction with Pay Level Satisfaction with Pay Raise Satisfaction with Pay Structure Satisfaction with Pay Benefits Work Family Conflict Family Work Conflict Direct Experiences of Offensive, Intimidating, or Hostile Behaviors. 34 Appendix Jobcode Groupings

3 INTRODUCTION In April 12, the University of Minnesota launched its fifth biennial Pulse survey endeavoring to take the pulse of the University s faculty and staff. Institutional and unit level reporting from the 08 and 10 Pulse surveys showed broad based interest in survey results and an increased understanding of how those results can inform improvements in the workplace experience. Substantial efforts were made to improve the survey instrument as well as the reporting tools, allowing for better in depth results reporting for individual units. The 12 survey is characterized by building on previous reporting enhancements to provide access to improved HR data that is accurate, relevant, and appropriate for planning, decision making, and required reporting. This report reflects a concerted effort to display results in a visually dynamic and statistically informative manner for individual units. Results include averages and standard deviations where appropriate so that readers can draw their own conclusions regarding the meaning and impact of the results. Explanatory text is provided primarily to contextualize the results with data definitions and scales. While maintaining unit anonymity, grouping information is provided to allow comparison to similarly sized units. High performing units (those performing one standard deviation or better than the system wide average) are highlighted in green. Those performing one or more standard deviations below the systemwide average are highlighted in yellow or red, respectively. Unit Abbreviation Unit Name Number of Number of 2 Completion Rate Instructional P&A Completion Rate Small Units (N = 8 to 50) Medium Units (N = ) Large Units (N = 170 ) DESGN Design, College of Pulse Report #: 42.% 31.0% 4 The number of faculty and displayed above represents the total number invited to participate in the survey. The completion rates for these groups represent the percent of those invited who completed the survey. To view the full 12 Pulse reports, visit 2

4 A NOTE ABOUT DATA PRIVACY In order to protect the identity and privacy of respondents, it is sometimes necessary to mask the number of respondents to a particular question. When this exclusion from the total is small and does not significantly alter the distribution of responses, the number and percentage for alternate responses are displayed. However, since the minimum number of respondents for any public display of data is five, a small total number (e.g., 25) can skew the remaining percentiles by more than 10 percent. Therefore, in order to avoid misunderstanding and incorrect interpretation, some breakouts especially in coordinate campus data have been necessarily omitted. 3

5 Overall Satisfaction Respondents were asked to rank the extent to which they agreed with the statement: Overall, I am satisfied with my employment at the University, with the responses 1 = Strongly Disagree and 5 = Strongly Agree. Responses to this overall satisfaction question provide an overview of their thoughts about working here

6 Recommend Employment at the University 0% 50% 100% This chart depicts the percentage of respondents who affirmatively answered the question: Would you recommend employment at the University to a friend or colleague? Responses to this question, similar to those for overall satisfaction, provide good insight on staff member s thoughts about working at the University. 4 Percent who answered "Yes" Unit 2.% 1.2% 83.7%.0% 7.3% 66.7%.6% 37.5% 72.6% 57.1% 6.4% 6.1% 66.7% 66.1% 0.0% 4.8% 6.8%.3%.5% 60.%.0% 57.6% 50.0% 57.5% 57.1% 51.6% 50.0% 67.1% 44.4% 70.2% 5

7 Accept Position at the University Again Respondents were asked to rank the extent to which they agreed with the statement: If I were doing it again, I would accept a position at the University, with 1 = Strongly Disagree and 5 = Strongly Agree. Responses give a general sense of employees' satisfaction with the overall University employment experience

8 Satisfaction with Work This index is based on responses to a set of statements given to describe a respondent s work, such as: Gives sense of accomplishment, Satisfying, Challenging. These responses reveal an employee s satisfaction with the work itself

9 Satisfaction with Department Chair/Responsible Administrator Support Responses to questions about support and help reveal whether faculty and feel their departmental leaders provide the resources and personal support necessary for their success. This index is based on responses to statements such as: My department chair takes the time to learn about my career goals and aspirations and My department chair makes sure I get the credit when I accomplish something substantial on the job, with 1 = Strongly Disagree and 5 = Strongly Agree

10 Satisfaction with Support for Scholarship and Teaching This table depicts faculty perceptions about people, services, and resources that facilitate effective work in scholarship and teaching. were asked to respond to statements that assessed their perception of factors related to support for scholarship and teaching, with 1 = Poor and 4 = Excellent. Unit Avg U of M Std Dev by Unit Classroom space Office Space Lab or Research Space Availability of nearby parking Library Resources Computer Resources Clerical and Administrative Staff Technical and Research Staff Computing Support Staff Support for Securing Grants Internal funding for new research ideas Internal funding for new teaching ideas Other Resources to Support Research Teaching Responsibilities Access to Teaching Assistants Advising Responsibilities Quality of Graduate Students

11 Satisfaction with Department Chair/Responsible Administrator This index more closely examines whether faculty and have good interpersonal relationships with their department chair or responsible administrator, which is a key indicator of employee engagement. This index is based on a set of statements that describe the respondent s department chair/responsible administrator, such as: Praises good work, Tactful, and Up to date. Higher scores indicate greater satisfaction

12 Satisfaction with Coworkers Responses to these questions reveal attitudes about coworkers, an important element of the overall workplace climate. This graph is based on responses to statements that describe faculty and satisfaction with their coworkers, such as: The majority of the people I work with are helpful, intelligent, and responsible. Higher scores indicate greater satisfaction

13 Understanding of Job Responsibilities This index measures the extent to which respondents agreed with the phrase: I know what is expected of me, where 1 = Strongly Disagree and 7 = Strongly Agree

14 Understanding of Job Importance Connection to the University s mission of extraordinary education, breakthrough research, and dynamic public engagement helps faculty and commit to their work in this organization. This index measures the extent to which respondents agreed with the phrase: I know how my job contributes to the mission of the University, where 1 = Strongly Disagree and 7 = Strongly Agree

15 Confidence in the Direction of my College/Administrative Unit For this new index, respondents were asked to rate the extent to which they agree with the statement: I have confidence in the direction my college/administrative unit is heading, with 1 = Strongly Disagree and 7 = Strongly Agree

16 Confidence in the Direction of my Department/Division For this new index, respondents were asked to rate the extent to which they agree with the statement: I have confidence in the direction my department/division is heading, with 1 = Strongly Disagree and 7 = Strongly Agree

17 Satisfaction with College/Administrative Unit Leadership Similar to the previous index, assessing confidence This index is based on responses to a set of in the direction of their work units, for this index, statements given to describe a respondent s work, respondents were asked to rate the extent to which such as: Gives sense of accomplishment, they agree with statements such as: I am satisfied Satisfying, Challenging. These responses reveal with my college/administrative unit leadership, an employee s satisfaction with the work itself. with 1 = Strongly Disagree to 7 = Strongly Agree

18 Satisfaction with Department/Division Leadership Similar to the previous index, these indices are based on responses to statements that assess This index is based on responses to a set of faculty satisfaction with the respective directions statements given to describe a respondent s work, their college as a whole are heading. However, in such as: Gives sense of accomplishment, this case, respondents were asked to rate the extent Satisfying, Challenging. These responses reveal to which they agree with statements such as: I am an employee s satisfaction with the work itself. satisfied with department/division leadership, with 1 = Strongly Disagree to 7 = Strongly Agree

19 Satisfaction with Tenure Process (on tenure track) on the tenure track were asked the extent to which they agreed with statements such as: I am able to significantly influence my tenure decision, with 1 = Strongly Disagree and 5 = Strongly Agree. Respondents who received tenure from the University within the last five years were asked parallel questions, but in the past tense: I was able to significantly influence my tenure decision. Unit Avg Std

20 Satisfaction with Tenure Process (tenured) on the tenure track were asked the extent to which they agreed with statements such as: I am able to significantly influence my tenure decision, with 1 = Strongly Disagree and 5 = Strongly Agree. Respondents who received tenure from the University within the last five years were asked parallel questions, but in the past tense: I was able to significantly influence my tenure decision. 4 Unit Avg Std

21 Clock stoppage Support Those faculty who indicated that they had stopped their tenure clock were asked for their perception of how supportive their department/unit was of their decision, 1= Very unsupportive, 5= Very supportive. 4 Unit Avg Std

22 Emphasis on Teaching (%) were asked to indicate what percentage of their work time presently is spent on teaching, research, service, and administrative duties. This question was followed by a request to indicate what percentage of their time they would prefer to spend on these activities. 4 Preferred Present Present Preferred

23 Emphasis on Research (%) were asked to indicate what percentage of their work time presently is spent on teaching, research, service, and administrative duties. This question was followed by a request to indicate what percentage of their time they would prefer to spend on these activities. 4 Preferred Present Present Preferred

24 Emphasis on Service (%) were asked to indicate what percentage of their work time presently is spent on teaching, research, service, and administrative duties. This question was followed by a request to indicate what percentage of their time they would prefer to spend on these activities. 4 Preferred Present Present Preferred

25 Perceptions of Job Security This index is based on responses to statements that reveal faculty and opinions about their future at the University, such as: My future at the University is Stable, Unpredictable, etc. Higher scores indicate a greater sense of stability

26 Turnover Intentions This index is based on a set of questions assessing a respondent s likelihood of leaving or quitting their job at the University, such as, How often do you think about quitting your job? and How likely is it that you will quit your job in the next several months? Higher scores indicate greater likelihood of turnover and higher levels of behavior disengaged from one s current work

27 Overall Satisfaction with Pay The Pay Satisfaction questions measure satisfaction on a variety of dimensions: Pay Level, Benefits, Pay Raise, and Pay Structure/Administration, with 1 = Very Dissatisfied and 5 = Very Satisfied. Overall satisfaction with pay is an aggregate index encompassing all of the pay satisfaction questions

28 Satisfaction with Pay Level The Satisfaction with Pay Level index reflects faculty and perceptions about being paid appropriately for their work. This index is based on responses to statements about satisfaction with: My take home pay, and My current salary, with 1 = Very Dissatisfied and 5 = Very Satisfied

29 Satisfaction with Pay Raise The Satisfaction with Pay Raise index reflects faculty and perceptions about being rewarded appropriately for their work. This index is based on responses to statements about satisfaction with: My most recent pay raise, and Influence my supervisor has over my pay, with 1 = Very Dissatisfied and 5 = Very Satisfied

30 Satisfaction with Pay Structure The Satisfaction with Pay Structure index reveals faculty and perceptions regarding the overarching pay policies and practices rather than their individual pay levels and raises. This index is based on responses to statements that assessed satisfaction with: Consistency of UMN s pay policies, and UMN s pay structure, with 1 = Very Dissatisfied and 5 = Very Satisfied

31 Satisfaction with Pay Benefits The Satisfaction with Pay Benefits index measures faculty and satisfaction with their benefits packages, including components such as retirement, medical, dental, life, and disability coverage. This index is based on responses to statements about satisfaction with: My benefit package, and The value of my benefits, with 1 = Very Dissatisfied and 5 = Very Satisfied. Of all the pay satisfaction sub indexes, satisfaction with pay benefits is consistently rated the highest

32 Work Family Conflict The Work Family Conflict index reflects faculty and attitudes about the impact of work demands on their personal family lives. Questions assessed the extent to which respondents work life interfered with their home life, with statements such as: The demands of my work interfere with my home and family life and My job produces strain that makes it difficult to fulfill family duties, with 1 = Strongly Disagree and 7 = Strongly Agree. Higher scores indicate greater negative impact on family due to work

33 Family Work Conflict Whereas the Work Family Conflict question set focused on perceptions of work demands impacting family life, the Family Work Conflict set of questions reveals attitudes about how family or life demands impact work. This index is based on responses to statements about whether respondents home life interfered with their work life, such as: The demands of my family or spouse/partner interfere with work related activities and Family related strain interferes with my ability to perform job related duties, with 1 = Strongly Disagree and 7 = Strongly Agree

34 Direct Experiences of Offensive, Intimidating, or Hostile Behaviors This index measures the frequency with which respondents had negative experiences at work over the past year, by asking whether they experirienced behaviors that are offensive, intimidating or hostile. Staff responses to these questions provide only a glimpse of perceptions regarding certain unfavorable experiences in the workplace and might indicate climate issues in the work group. Responses ranged from 1 = Never to 5 = Very Often

35 APPENDIX Job code Groupings The 10 Pulse reporting mechanisms display results according to respondent job code group. Respondents were classified into one of six University of Minnesota job code groupings depending on what best defined their primary appointment: (FA), Instructional P&A (), Academic Administrator (AA), non instructional Academic Professional (AP), Civil Service (CS), and Bargaining Unit (BU). Because many U of M employees have multiple roles on campus, it was necessary to classify each respondent based on the job code that best defines what one primarily does. For example, a vice president may also hold a tenured faculty position, but since his or her administrative duties are their primary responsibility, they are classified as an Academic Administrator and are not asked questions on the Pulse exclusive to faculty. It should be further noted that the use of the term adjunct within the (FA) categories refers to faculty with a tenure appointment in one U of M college or department, but with a current primary appointment in another. For example, an Adjunct Professor could be someone with a tenure appointment from the Law School but currently has a primary appointment in the College of Biological Sciences. FA () Adjunct Assistant Professor Clinical Associate Professor Teaching Assistant Professor Adjunct Associate Professor Clinical Instructor Teaching Associate Professor Adjunct Instructor Clinical Professor Visiting Assistant Professor Adjunct Professor Instructor Visiting Associate Professor Adjunct Teaching Professor Professor Visiting Instructor Assistant Professor Regents Professor Visiting Professor Associate Professor Research Assistant Professor Clinical Assistant Professor Research Professor (Instructional P&A) Lecturer Sr Teaching Specialist Sr Lctr/Teaching Asst Prof Senior Lecturer Sr Lctr/Tchg Assoc Prof Teaching Specialist 34